Inscutable Brief Leads To Appellate Affirmance

The Connecticut Appellate Court affirmed dismissal of an attorney’s civil claims

The plaintiffs, Law Offices of Frank N. Peluso, P.C., and Frank Peluso, appeal from the judgment of the trial court dismissing their complaint against the defendant, Joy M. Rendahl, on the basis of absolute litigation immunity. We agree with the defendant that the plaintiffs’ brief on appeal is inscrutable. Nonetheless, even if we were to read the plaintiffs’ primary claim broadly, in the manner advanced at oral argument, i.e., as claiming that the defendant does not have absolute immunity or, alternatively, that we should abrogate any legal precedent affording the defendant absolute immunity, we conclude that the claim fails on the merits 

The present case arises out of a series of disputes that our trial courts have aptly characterized as an ‘‘escalating,’’ ‘‘all-out’’ war involving ‘‘needless vituperation between the parties and their attorneys.’’ On November 20, 2012, the plaintiffs filed a second revised complaint (‘‘operative complaint’’), alleging four causes of action based on the defendant’s successful removal of Peluso as executor of the estate of her mother, Frances Middleton Rendahl, and successful challenge to the fees the plaintiffs charged for their services to the estate. Specifically, the plaintiffs pleaded the following tortious conduct for each count: ‘‘seeking to remove Frank N. Peluso, Esq. as Executor of the decedent’s Estate, and by seeking to eliminate the Plaintiffs’ earned fees for their duties as Executor and Attorney for the decedent’s Estate.’’

 The court concluded that each of four counts were properly dismissed. (Mike Frisch)